HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary HCDC Packet
HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION (HCDC)
January 21, 2021
Electronic Regular Meeting – 6:30 PM
Zoom Meeting Platform
AGENDA:
1. Call to Order
2. Consideration of Meeting Minutes: November 19, 2020
3. Public Comment of Items not on the Agenda
Commentators shall address the Commission for no more than 5 minutes.
Commissioners shall not engage in discussion with the public concerning said items.
4. Housekeeping Items
Chair Padron will discuss best practices for Zoom meetings and provide an update on
the Iowa City Affordable Housing Plan Steering Committee.
5. Overview of the Coordinated Entry Process
Mark Sertterh, Associate Executive Director of Shelter House, will present an overview
of the Coordinated Entry process.
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is
impossible or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of
Commission members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
You can participate in the meeting and comment on an agenda item by
going to: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN__XOrXYYQRNqTtSVtN1tgdg
to visit the Zoom meeting’s registration page and submitting the
required information. Once approved, you will receive an email
message with a link to join the meeting. If you are asked for a meeting
or webinar ID, enter the ID number found in the email. If you have no
computer or smartphone, or a computer without a microphone, you can
call in by phone by dialing (312) 626-6799 and entering the meeting ID
915 3632 5387 when prompted. Providing comment in person is not an
option.
2
If you will need disability-related accommodations to participate in this program or event, please
contact Brianna Thul at brianna-thul@iowa-city.org or 319-356-5230. Early requests are strongly
encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs.
6. Annual Project Monitoring Presentations
HCDC reviews CDBG/HOME funded projects annually. HCDC will discuss the project
to ensure it is proceeding properly by serving the intended clientele, and that it will be
completed on time. This month will include updates from three agencies: 4Cs
Community Coordinated Child Care, Habitat for Humanity, and Mayor’s Youth
Empowerment Program.
7. FY22 CDBG/HOME Tentative Calendar
Staff will provide an overview of tentative CDBG/HOME and Emerging Aid to
Agencies calendar and answer any questions Commissions may have about the role
of HCDC as it relates to the funding cycle.
8. Racial Equity Toolkit
Staff will provide an overview of the Racial Equity Toolkit and explain how it is used at
the City.
9. Iowa City Council Meeting Updates
Two commissioners are assigned each month to monitor Council meetings. This
agenda item provides an opportunity to review assignment schedule and for brief
updates on City Council activity relevant to HCDC business.
10. Aid to Agency Visit Reports
Commissioners will provide a summary of their visits with assigned agencies.
11. Housing & Community Development Information
12. Adjournment
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 19, 2020 – 6:30 PM
ELECTRONIC MEETING
MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Matt Drabek, Lyn Dee Hook Kealey, Theresa Lewis, Nasr
Mohammed, Peter Nkumu, Kyle Vogel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Aguilar, Maria Padron
STAFF PRESENT: Brianna Gabel, Erika Kubly
OTHERS PRESENT: Lucy Barker, Kristie Fortmann-Doser, Mark Sertterh
CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
Drabek called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM.
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 15, 2020:
Alter moved to approve the minutes of October 15, 2020. Lewis seconded and a vote was taken and the
motion passed 7-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
IOWA CITY COUNCIL MEETING UPDATES:
Alter stated for the November 2 meeting she read the meeting notes and then watch the video for the
most relevant sections. Staff went over what the state legislative priorities memo would be and what they
would be then carrying forward as strategic priorities to the State that the City of Iowa City is in favor of
and she noted there were a few that were very heartening because they specifically dealt with affordable
housing. One of them was protecting Home Rule Authority for local government, including flexibility in
local building codes, revenue options, land use decisions and preservation of City's authority to restrict
housing discrimination based on source of income. Additionally, the City is supporting the University of
Iowa Student Government proposal regarding rental property move-in checklists. Legislative Bill 2216
was introduced during the 2020 legislative session to require landlords to provide and use an inventory
checklist at the start and the end of tenancy with a process for implementation. This is basically to protect
Electronic Meeting
(Pursuant to Iowa Code section 21.8)
An electronic meeting is being held because a meeting in person is impossible
or impractical due to concerns for the health and safety of Commission
members, staff and the public presented by COVID-19.
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 2 of 15
2
tenants against unfair housing practices, specifically withholding of rental deposits based on
disagreements about what was or wasn't there when one moved in. Another really big thing during 2020
that the City has gotten involved in early on, but now are lending written support of legislation is protecting
the rights of manufactured housing residents. This came out of some predatory out of state
manufactured housing property owners that bought a property in North Liberty and were essentially going
to jack the prices up to the point that most of the tenants would have to be evicted. So the City is
supporting legislation protecting the rights of manufactured housing residents, including statewide caps
on the frequency and percentage of increases, lengthen notice periods for proposed increases, uniform
good cause eviction standards, fair fee regulations, fair lease provisions and effective enforcement
mechanisms to combat illegal provisions. Alter noted there's an awful lot of exploitation by out of state
owners of these manufactured home parks.
Another topic at the meeting Alter stated was a continued discussion from an October meeting about
broadband and the support of a state-wide strengthening and access to broadband throughout the state.
Alter tangentially noted at the meeting there was quite a bit of rezoning coming through and is something
for them to keep an eye since there is an accelerated 2021 affordable housing plan and there's been
some rezoning of the Riverside Drive/Myrtle area. There is a proposal to go from medium density, single
family residential to high density, multi family, residential and community commercial with bonus heights,
going from five floors to seven stories. This Commission needs to continue to have conversations about
as there is more development with more apartments, what's the percentage of them actually being
affordable and what does that mean, what's the AMI.
Alter mentioned a report by Wendy Ford, who is the economic development director, about the annual
TIF certification and that they are starting to collect revenues from the Foster Road project with 55% of
that money is going towards the Foster Road project itself, but 45% of it is actually going to affordable
housing.
Vogel stated he is curious when talking about keeping an eye on zoning, what is the role of HCDC as far
as zoning goes, after all there's a whole other commission that deals with zoning approval. He stated that
development has already had their good neighbor meeting, and the project is moving ahead. Vogel did
state he is not a big fan of where they currently do and do not allow affordable housing to be considered
as part of zoning, he thinks that map is horribly written and the fact that it doesn't include downtown
requirements. He added it is troublesome when there is the amount of vacancies and lack of affordable
housing already on the individual apartment basis and the City's looking at approving another seven story
tall multi-hundred bed monstrosity of an apartment complex.
Alter replied in terms of the first comment about the HCDC role, there isn't much other than to know that
this is a place where they can actually see in advance of something coming to them about how there
have been developers who have been working and trying to see what kind of bonuses or whatnot that
they can get from the City, but they have to actually put in a certain amount of affordable housing to do
so. She added there have been times in the past that this Commission has been fairly vocal about their
interest in turning more opportunities into affordable ones. Alter also noted they have had in the past
conversations about that map and there was pretty much a consensus that it needs to be refreshed.
Vogel stated he finds it interesting because he feels like affordable housing and zoning do go hand in
hand but it doesn't come to this Commission until the point where it's already been approved and that can
be a frustration.
Nkumu asked about the checklist that the landlord and tenants are supposed to have, he was under the
impression that checklist always should be included when someone's signed a lease to rent an apartment
so is this something new or something that was never mandatory before now and they want make it
mandatory.
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 3 of 15
3
Drabek said he isn’t able to say for sure that it was or wasn't mandatory, he doesn’t think it was
mandatory, but either way he can guarantee that most of the time it didn't happen.
Vogel confirmed it is not part of 562A, which means it's not part of the landlord tenant act. It is absolutely
good practices and he would argue that good property managers and good landlords are providing a
move-in checklist that they then use to look at as part of a move out inspection a year or two years or five
years down the road. It's not a requirement legally under 562A so it's not required by state law, which is
what this legislation would like to rectify and require landlords across the state to do this. He stated this is
going to be a tough pull at the state level and is not sure what will happen at the city level. He agreed it's
not a bad idea, it is one of a handful of good ideas that unfortunately don't get passed on a regular basis.
The Iowa City Area Apartment Association for years has been trying to get the state government to
actually separate Ames, Iowa City and Cedar Falls to try to create a separate tenant landlord act for the
university towns but haven't been able to get traction on that at the State House for years. Another big
issue that only Iowa City has is tenants move-in in August and then expected to sign a renewal in October
for the next year. That's a problem that only exists in Ames and Iowa City and it is mind boggling that it’s
not illegal.
Drabek asked if during that part of the City Council's discussion did they discuss local equivalence to a lot
of this stuff or are they pretty well determined that state law doesn't really allow them to do anything
without permission from the state. Was the discussion just focused on getting the state to do things
because he feels that's just sort of throwing things at a black hole. Alter agreed the City isn’t able to do
much because of the state and the way the state has taken away so much away from the City.
Mohammed stated he attended the Tuesday November 17 City Council meeting, but there was nothing
related to the Commission’s business mentioned at the meeting. The meeting was about proclamations,
land and zoning and appointees to different commissions.
ANNUAL PROJECT MONITORING PRESENTATIONS:
Drabek stated tonight they have representatives from DVIP, Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County
and Shelter House who will be doing these presentations.
Gabel noted Neighborhood Centers submitted a written project update that was included in the agenda
packet.
Kristie Fortmann-Doser (DVIP) noted it has been a very busy time. She noted while she is giving her
report, she would like to accept questions from the Commission, so don't hesitate to interrupt her. DVIP
provides crisis intervention services for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, stalking and human
trafficking. They just celebrated 40 years a little over a year ago, and of course so much has happened in
2020 so she is going to focus to some degree on the pandemic and how that's impacted domestic
violence services in the communities. Like everyone, they had to on a moment's notice, turn on a dime,
and change how they were doing all of their services. That has been a pretty standard impact of the
coronavirus pandemic, on the community and on programs throughout the country. For DVIP it meant
that most of their services became virtual in a video format and not in person with the exception of their
shelter services. The shelter services remained but they did go through a time period where they were
depopulated. Fortmann-Doser will also talk a little bit about the outreach services and those services
going virtual was the biggest impact of the pandemic. They know this because of research and data from
across the country on other natural disasters and incidents of great significant impact on a community is
that their numbers went very, very quiet in March, April and early May. But by the end of May, their
numbers started jumping dramatically. Requests for support services were up 20% over the previous year
and the statewide hotline was seeing 3000 new callers a month starting in June. As some of the national
reports have been stating, domestic violence is being called the secret pandemic because behind the
pandemic is the reality that victims are typically isolated in spaces, in homes, with their intimate partners,
and the level of difficulty, and the level of stress has a huge impact. Fortmann-Doser was recently at a
meeting talking about their services and Rachel from the Johnson County Attorney's Office, who is the
primary attorney who prosecutes domestics, said that the thing that has surprised her so much over the
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 4 of 15
4
last two to three months is the level of lethality that she's seen. The level of violence has been
significantly jumping. To give a frame, in this service area they’ve only had two homicides in the last six
years and now they’ve had two homicides just in the last six months. They are seeing more dangerous
situations in a time when they have many, many fewer resources.
Fortmann-Doser next discussed the DVIP shelter, in the early parts of the pandemic one of the steps that
was recommended by the CDC and by HUD, who is one of their major funders, was that shelters either
diminished significantly or depopulate. DVIP shelter did that along with Shelter House, they depopulated
during the months of April and May and then started bringing people back in but one of the realities is
shelters are designed for communal living and spaces that are shared. The DVIP Shelter bedrooms are
eight foot by 10 foot, but they have four bunk beds in them. Therefore when they started bringing people
back into shelter, they could only support half of their typical census. So they began using hotels for
emergency sheltering in a way that is quite unprecedented and have spent about $60,000 on hotels since
the pandemic started. In addition to the 15 to 20 people that were able to be sheltered in the shelter
location safely they were also housing anywhere from 3 to 10 people in hotel rooms on a nightly basis
which they knew was not sustainable. They are having conversations on the community level with other
service providers like Shelter House and food security programs, and local municipalities and their
funders, to start talking about what is it going to look like this winter as things are ramping up so
significantly. Fortmann-Doser stated they were very lucky to be able to work with a local developer to
gain five apartments to rent at a reduced rate that they will be able to use between now and sometime
next summer. In those apartments they will be able to house anywhere from 10 to 15 people and it will
cost DVIP significantly less than hotels, but that doesn't mean that hotels are completely out of the picture
because there is never a day when the DVIP shelter isn’t completely full, a down night is 32 people full
status is 35.
Fortmann-Doser stated last year they served a total of 1877 people and that includes March, April, May,
and June, a time when their numbers dropped pretty significantly. Fortmann-Doser also noted that 1877
is only 15 less than the previous year, so they were already on projectile to meet what they had done
previously and will probably go up by about 10%. They sheltered 356 individuals last year, which again is
pretty much normal and once again, they had three months where they were doing half the census that
they normally do. Fortmann-Doser stated this is a complex situation that they're dealing with in a time
when everybody just wants to be able to stay safe.
Vogel asked when the new facility on South Gate would be open and able to be used.
Mark Sertterh (Associate Executive Director, Shelter House) said that facility is scheduled to have
services in the building with all the mental health services enacting at the beginning of February 2021.
He did add there is a corner on the far east side of the building that is permanently for the winter shelter
and then during the off months it will be used for other various meeting spaces and that type of stuff. They
are hoping to be able to get into that part of the building starting in the beginning of January.
Vogel asked if that is going to be a space for only Shelter House or if DVIP is going to be able to use that
space as well. Fortmann-Doser said that is not space for DVIP to use but in terms of the services that are
going to be provided at that building, DVIP will actually use those as well.
Vogel asked if the apartments they are renting are existing apartments in town or is a developer building
new apartments. Fortmann-Doser replied they are existing apartments in town and are paying about a
30% cut on their expense and allowing them to put in security cameras. They are actually renting six
apartments total where they have a place that they can have staff to support the individuals staying there
so they have a component for services, because one of the things they learned using hotels during the
depopulation was that people just fall through the cracks and it’s really hard to connect with people when
they're staying in the hotels and this way they're going to have somebody right on site hopefully 24 hours.
Vogel asked if DVIP is also having to furnish the apartments and are they working with Houses into
Homes or another program or group to furnish those places. He noted that's always been the issue of
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 5 of 15
5
being able to do short term housing for people in apartments, in his complexes he’s got at any given time
of year about 20 units DVIP could use but the problem is there's no beds or couches. Fortmann-Doser
said when they went into the depopulation back in March and April, in addition to using hotels they did get
a set of apartments to use at that time and they put out a call and people donated furnishings. They will
keep all those furnishings and can also give those to families as they move into their own apartments.
Vogel did acknowledge he has been working closely with DVIP staff in the last few months and has been
really impressed with the work that they've done as far as getting people into the places they need to get
to get out of bad situations.
Mohammad asked if they were able to serve all the people who reach out to for services. Fortmann-
Doser replied yes they were able to but did add that their services are crisis based, which means they
don't go as far as what victims actually need but provide emergency housing and shelter. There are
times when they have somebody who isn't in significant danger that they may try and work with them to
stay with a friend for a little while or try other alternative services. They will continue to provide other
services but it may not be emergency shelter based on what's going on with their situation.
Nkumu asked how long the clients stay at the emergency shelter. Fortmann-Doser said they can stay in
the shelter for 45 days. If someone does have an apartment but they just can't get into it for a couple
weeks they can stay in our shelter a bit longer than the 45 days. They will also work with individuals who
don't have legal immigration status and may not be able to get an apartment, it may take them longer to
get the resources together so they can stay for an additional 45 days. So 45 days is their guideline, but
there are special circumstances. Fortmann-Doser explained that's not a lot of time but probably about
seven years ago their length of stay was actually 90 days and then when Iowa reorganized funding for
domestic violence programs and shelters, they dropped from 28 shelters to just 8 shelters in the entire
state of Iowa so they had to change our length of stay in order to make sure that they could still
accommodate everyone now that they were serving eight counties rather than four for emergency shelter.
They now work with landlords and other property owners to have apartments in other counties to make
sure that they do have resources in other counties because they don't want to make people leave their
home community unless that's the only way that they can stay safe.
Lewis noted one thing that really stuck with her when they had their conversation was the challenge to
this Commission and to the City as well with that paycheck to paycheck reference, and she was
wondering if Fortmann-Doser could give that same kind of challenge through her own voice to this
Commission. Fortmann-Doser stated one of the things that she thinks is really critical for organizations
and commissions is to really look at how is it that they support organizations, they are supported to be
credible and ongoing resources for individuals moving forward. Many times they're working with
individuals who are struggling just to make ends meet and they can get them an apartment, but staying in
that apartment and keeping that resource is so difficult. And now in the pandemic some of what they're
dealing with is how much more of a challenge it is to even reach out and even connect with resources.
She would challenge the Commission to really look at how much of an impact DVIP programs and all of
the human service programs are having in the community and what kind of a budget they're doing that on
and the impact of not having increases over time that even match cost of living increases, much less the
level of requests for services that that they get. She believes one in three or one in four Johnson County
residents has some kind of direct contact with the United Way partner organization and to have that kind
of impact in the community is significant and to see funding that doesn't have increases that even
respond to cost of living means they're actually losing so much ground in terms of the citizens and the
communities.
Alter asked how far off are they in their typical fundraising given this year with the pandemic and in the
economic situation. Fortmann-Doser replied for this fiscal year that they’ve just closed, if one actually
looks at the numbers they have been adding a significant amount of funding, but that is because of the
CARES Act funding, and funding very specific to the pandemic, which is critical. However, that nearly
$60,000 that they put out in hotels about $22,000 of that was covered by FEMA. They have been doing
some fundraising and have been taking some out of direct aid funding that they have some flexibility with
the Crime Victims Assistance Division. Fortmann-Doser said in this first month of the new fiscal year they
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 6 of 15
6
have used 20% of their funding just for hotels and that's supposed to be for direct aid for the full year, so
that's not good. She added that money is incredibly helpful, but it is very specific, they can only use it for
specific counties. For example, they got money for the southeast region and that CARES Act money can
only be used in four counties. Shelter House did get money for Johnson County so DVIP partner with
them and DVIP clients are able to benefit through Shelter House which is a fabulous collaboration. There
are also additional costs they are incurring to support the back end of the organization, they're going to
have to add another cleaning person, they've added two full time staff people just to clean, and there is no
budget for that. They are spending about $1500 a month just on PPE. They are continuing to fundraise
but overall fundraising for the operations of the organization is probably down about 25%.
Drabek introduced the next presenter.
Mark Sertterh (Associate Executive Director, Shelter House) knows many are familiar with Shelter House
so he will just go over a little bit what Aid to Agencies funds do and the overall robust amount of services
they provide with the Aid to Agencies money. Shelter House for longest time has been known as a
homeless assistance provider but quite frankly in the pandemic they’ve done a lot more than working with
people who are experiencing homelessness, which he’ll explain in a bit. With regards to Aid to Agencies
money, he will talk a little bit about emergency shelter because that is really what they spend most of the
money this Commission and the City of Iowa City allocate. They do have a lot of other services and lots
of different housing assistance programs, but most of those are paid from federal grants, and not money
that may come from the City. The emergency shelter is a 70 bed shelter on Southgate Avenue that
they've been operating for 10 years and they serve men, women and families there. Over the last year
they served over 900 people but as the pandemic hit their maximum allotment has been 45 since the end
of March. They also have been using hotels for sheltering too. In the shelter people are at least six feet
apart, trying to maximize the amount of space and they stagger the mealtimes that people are eating.
They also have drop in service, during the daytime, 1pm to 4pm every afternoon Monday through Friday,
and then 8am to 10am on the weekends, people can come in and shower and do laundry. Sertterh
stated laundry is probably the most popular thing, they did 865 loads of laundry last year for folks. Even
people that don’t use the shelter but are living in the community and are low income, can come and have
their laundry done for free and take a shower. He acknowledged they’ve had to significantly cut those
services down during the pandemic to try to keep the numbers in the building low, so they’ve been doing
it by appointment. It has been a challenge, it is a service that a lot of people have counted on.
Emergency shelter and these drop-in services are funded by the Aid to Agencies funds.
Sertterh next discussed the demographics of who they serve. 16% of the people they serve in
emergency shelter each year are children and families, they see a lot of families, they have six rooms that
are dedicated towards families so that they can have more privacy. The single adults live in more of a
dormitory type style places with shared bathrooms. Over 50% of the people they serve report that they
have a disabling condition, and he would suspect that number is quite low from what it what it really is. A
disabling condition is either a mental health issue, a substance use disorder, a physical disability, a
chronic health issue, or HIV AIDS. Additionally 14% of people they serve and shelter are veterans.
Next Sertterh talked briefly about some of the other types of things they do and most is federally funded
through Housing and Urban Development at the federal government level is Rapid Rehousing. Sertterh
noted for most people that enter the homeless system it is the first time and the only time, and they really
need some type of light touch to help them. Rapid Rehousing has three core components of helping
someone that's homeless, find housing, provide short term rental assistance to them, which is security
deposits, rental assistance, and then wraparound services and supportive services for some time after
that with the hope that they're going to maintain and move forward. That is the vast majority of people and
this year they have already served almost 400 people in that service as of November 19th. Having those
services help keep the shelter population down and serve more people more quickly. They have also
received federal funds from the CARES Act. Sertterh stated they also do permanent supportive housing,
they own four homes in the community, three of them are in Iowa City, and one is in Coralville. At least
two if not three of them have partially used HOME funds from the City of Iowa City to purchase the
homes. They are homes for people who were formerly homeless and now live together in a peer support
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 7 of 15
7
model. They live together, they support themselves with staff support, but it's limited staff support and
more of a peer support model where they help each other. They hold each other accountable at times
and it’s a really unique and impactful program for people.
Sertterh stated another way they do permanent supportive housing is Cross Park Place, which is 24 one
bedroom apartments they built and constructed for people who were formerly chronically homeless.
These are people they identified through many different realms working with the police department and
University Hospitals and Clinics to try to identify the folks that are the most needy in the community that
cycled through all those different types of systems. Many of them lived on the streets for years, some
decades, but now moved into this apartment complex with staff support. There's 24-hour staff at the front
desk and also a lot of intensive case management support services and medical services, they have
primary healthcare on site as well as psychiatry services on site. It has been a great project and they’re
excited to say they’re planning on doing another building with 36 units right next to their current Southgate
building and hoping to start construction in 2022. This project is funded with National Housing Trust Fund
dollars, almost $3 million.
Lastly Sertterh discussed homelessness prevention services which is in response to the COVID-19
pandemic and the City of Iowa City was one of the first to be involved with that. The City awarded Shelter
House $50,000 to administer as rental and mortgage assistance for folks that were in arrears or for
utilities in arrears for folks that had a hardship due to COVID-19 or income loss due to COVID-19 and
those people met a certain income threshold. With the CARES Act funding that came out, Shelter House
was also awarded a large amount of money for homelessness prevention and at present time they have
spent over $100,000 of that. Additionally, the Iowa Finance Authority has invested $20 million dollars and
Johnson County has paid $1.2 million of rental and mortgage assistance and utility assistance to Johnson
County residents. The second round of CARES Act funding has been doing awards for the Iowa Finance
Authority and Shelter House has applied for more homelessness prevention funds, which they are hoping
they will able to use it all the way to the end of 2022. Those funds are for anybody in Johnson or
Washington County.
Another consequence of the pandemic is all the public facilities are closed, especially the library and
recreation center which has an effect on the homeless. Sertterh stated on Monday that Shelter House
will open what they call a day shelter environment at the recreation center. The City of Iowa City has
volunteered that space as it is not being used for anything throughout the wintertime and can be a place
for people that don't have anywhere else to go. Right now people can't even go to Free Lunch to eat a
meal, they have to get served outside and they can't sit down anywhere, so this will be a place for people
that don't have anywhere else to go and essentially get out of the cold weather during the daytime while
the winter shelters are closed being cleaned. Sertterh did note they don’t know how they are going to pay
for this yet but are working through that.
Vogel asked about the building they’re hoping to put in next door, in 2018 when Cross Park was created
City Council passed a measure to set aside about 5% of the Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) payments
from HUD for project based reimbursement primarily to make sure that those 24 units always had access
to funds and will the additional 36 units still fall under that 5% that's currently being set aside or do they
feel like they're going to need to go back to City Council and ask for an additional percentage of money to
be held aside for project. Vogel acknowledged there is currently such a long waiting list for HCV and for
housing funds. Sertterh response that all 36 units will have project based Housing Choice Vouchers and
of course there is the concern of there being enough HCV for other non-project based housing. The City
Housing Authority is working on how to prioritize vouchers and he knows that there are people on the
waitlist that will never get a Housing Choice Voucher because there there's always going to be somebody
that jumps ahead because they have a different qualifying condition of disability, elderly, etc. They try to
prioritize people with the highest needs.
Vogel asked if they know what the current number of vouchers is because even 5% should be more than
enough to cover the 60 units between Cross Park and the new facility. He wondered if anyone else in
town is currently utilizing that 5% aside from Cross Park. Kubly replied that only Cross Park is receiving
project-based vouchers. She doesn’t know what the current number of available project-based vouchers
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 8 of 15
8
for the City is offhand, but she did acknowledge the new project falls within what has already been
approved.
Vogel also wanted to share with Sertterh he is always impressed with the Shelter House staff and their
dedication and follow up making sure everything is taken care of. Sertterh appreciates the kind words
and if any of Vogel’s tenants are having struggles with rental assistance and things like that, they have
this new funding to help people. That needs to be shared with all property owners and property
managers to just remind people of that.
Sertterh thanked the Commission for their support and for allowing this time to discuss Shelter House and
their programs.
Drabek reminded everyone that in the packet was an update from Neighborhood Centers of Johnson
County. Gabel added if any questions come up she is happy to send any questions their way and get a
response. She can read a couple statistics form the report on their projects so far, their year to date
outcomes and the children that they've served. From ages zero to five they served 185 and they've
served 129 families and had over 2000 face to face visits. The reports also talks about some of the
COVID related problems they're having with the school district closing down and a lot of their programs
taking place in the schools and that sounds like that was a challenge for them.
Vogel asked where the physical Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County are. He is curious because
there was a lot of discussion about programs but not what it takes to man physical locations. Gabel
knows some of their before and after school programs are in the physical schools and Kubly added they
have two locations, one on Broadway and one at Pheasant Ridge.
Vogel asked if those centers were manned throughout the week, like eight to five or what is their overall
manpower requirements or actual office hours on site. Kubly replied in normal times they're providing
childcare during the week, so staff is there, but during COVID she doesn’t know what they are doing.
Lewis stated she is pretty familiar with them from her stint on another board for which they receive
funding. They do have office hours and staff, at least before COVID, that worked eight to five and
performed administrative type coordination. They also have a lot of staff that are part time and work at the
at the schools doing the childcare so there's a combination of full-time administrative staff and part-time
that provide the direct services.
Mohammad asked if the Neighborhood Centers observe any COVID-19 outbreak or cases and how do
they manage to mitigate these situations and what is most challenging that's facing them right now and
they plan to solve it. Gabel said she can pass those questions along. She did add Neighborhood
Centers was one that was involved with the nest program, so when the schools closed, and everything
went online, they were one of the ones who opened what they called a nest that kids in a nest
neighborhood could come in and get virtual learning support.
Alter added that Tony Branch with Neighborhood Centers was actually heading up the Alexander
Elementary nest and about a week after it opened the nest itself had to close down because of exposure.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF FY22 CDBG/HOME AND EMERGING AID TO AGENCIES APPLICATION
MATERIALS:
Drabek moved onto the next agenda item, the applications for emerging agencies and what they're doing
here is taking any comments or suggestions or improvements on that application.
Lewis asked if it still is a part of the United Way application process because in a previous meeting they
talked about doing some work to try and get the United Way to change their process from annual.
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 9 of 15
9
Kubly stated that for the legacy agencies they have a joint application process with United Way, but the
one in particular that they're looking at today is emerging and the City collects those applications on the
same timeline as the CDBG and HOME applications. It goes out in December and is due in January.
Regarding the timeline with United Way, she believes the Commission sent a memo to Council but she
hasn’t heard anything more about that.
Lewis noted there were two applications and asked who actually applies for the CDBG/HOME funds, the
application that didn’t say it was for emerging. Gabel said that is for the regular cycle. The applications
will go out after they are approved, in December, and will be due at the end of January. Then when the
Commission meets in February the discussion will start on allocating the normal CDBG and HOME
funding. Kubly added these ones are typically the affordable housing projects and sometimes public
facility improvements.
Drabek had one comment on the application, it comes up from time to time, but there's always the
question here about how much emphasis they should put on community impact versus emphasis on
leveraging other financial resources. Because it's a careful balance and need evidence that these are
stable organizations that are able to succeed but on the other hand it can be a hamster wheel for
emerging agencies, as essentially they need money to get money. He is wondering if maybe it wasn't
tilted a little too far toward the leveraging other financial resources part and not far enough toward the
community impact part.
Vogel said he would want to see organizations not just relying on tax income for their projects to succeed
and as far as scalability his issue is that there should be no requirement they have to put so much in but if
they have someone coming to them asking for $1,000, if they put $500 and they're going to get the 13
points the same way as someone who's coming for $500,000 who puts $250,000 is getting the same
point so he doesn’t don't feel like it punishes smaller organizations looking to make a difference. He feels
it puts everybody on a similar footing where it's not dollar based, it's percentage based. He does
somewhat agree as far as community impact, but he also feels sometimes that falls back into the
leveraging resources question. If they throw $1,000 at a problem, and it helps 100 people, but they throw
$200,000 at a problem that helps five people, what is the leveraging resources budget points for that and
what is the feasibility community impact point of that. He feels there is no way to have a one answer for
all because everybody does different things and have different impacts. He is comfortable with the
application as is, he doesn’t know that there's a happy solution, he doesn’t have a problem with the 35-40
point issue. His question is should there be some kind of bonus points given by Commission approval.
Alter noted one of the things that they've had a lot of really robust conversations in the past with the
agencies, and about the application process, has been this is frustrating to them, this notion of
squishiness. So the notion of offering bonus points based on what the Commission feels that night, or has
come to a consensus or something about one that's most deserving, tends to be pretty problematic from
an agency perspective. The Commission has worked, and continues to work, to make it as clear as
possible, about what agency can expect they're going to be evaluated on. She gave a little bit of history
where some of the conversations that have been pretty tough in the past, were when the agencies have
been sitting here watching their application literally be dissected on screen while things are being parsed
out and these very comparisons are being made. They have stated if they don't know what the
parameters are, then what can they do to better prepare their applications. Alter also wanted to point out,
especially with this being for emerging agencies, that it's less about them being able to put some of that
skin in the game themselves because emerging agencies usually don't have any other resources or the
funding larger agencies do and they don't have the kind of network and the grant making abilities.
Lewis asked if the matching fund is a federal or state or just a city requirement. Kubly replied that the
HOME program requires a specific match, but it's just part of the scoring criteria.
Drabek acknowledged that Alter summarized some of the past conversations very pretty well and
basically the way the criteria are laid out they’re given roughly equal weight, it's 35 points versus 40
points. His first thought is, he’d like to see it at about a two to one way where community impact is worth
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 10 of 15
10
roughly twice as much as leveraging of existing funds. That was his first approach to it for emerging
agencies that might be a good weighting.
Kubly stated the scoring criteria that's in the packet is just for CDBG and HOME, she doesn’t believe they
have a scoring setup for emerging agencies. Gabel confirmed that's right. There's a lot of documents in
the packet this month because there are actually four applications included. She noted they are planning
to do the CDBG and HOME applications a little bit different this year by doing a phase one and phase two
application. The financial verification is the phase two because when people apply early in the project,
they don't usually have all the specific financial details figured out yet.
Kubly added one clarification, in the CDBG and HOME application there is the affordable housing location
model and they are in the process of updating that for this year so the final application is going to have an
updated version when we put that out in December. She wanted to make sure to point that out.
Vogel motioned to approve the FY22 application materials as presented with the understanding
that the Affordable Housing Location Model will be updated before the application is officially
posted.
Lewis seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF FY20 CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE & EVALUATION
REPORT (CAPER):
Drabek said they will open this for discussion and then at some point votes up or down on this. They’ve
seen a wide variety of attitudes as to the importance of the CAPER and the importance of some of the
details as an overview or with some line by line edits. No judgement on how anyone wants to view it.
Lewis noted as this is her first time looking through it, it is an incredibly long document, but there were
some places where she paid a little bit more attention to than others. She does have a couple questions,
she is not going to suggest line by line edits, but just for clarity in looking through it. Her first question is
on pages 3 and 4 and also page 11, where it states the priority areas for the City Steps. She noticed that
there's only a few of the Aid to Agency legacy agencies listed there and wondered if it important that
funding to all of them is demonstrated as meeting one or more areas of the City Step goals.
Gabel believes those are the projects that are specifically funded with CDBG and some legacy agencies
are funded with local funds. Kubly confirmed that a majority of the legacy agencies are funded locally with
general funds. For this report they focus specifically on the federally funded and there's usually three
projects each year that they fund with CDBG public service funds, rather than local funds because they
can only spend 15% of the CDBG allocation on public services.
Lewis next asked about the table that’s on pages five through seven and in the column where it has the
funding CDBG funds and others, it's zero, and then there's some percentages and other things that don't
look like they're completed in some of those boxes. Gabel explained the way this works is they have to
input all the data into the system called IDIS and it doesn't always lift the information it should when the
tables that are auto generated. The table on pages five to seven are auto generated so they can't really
do a whole lot with it. The tables below that, on pages 10 and beyond are the ones that they manually
created to add context, because the way the system generates it is not always very clear.
Lewis asked about the report on page 22, the totals of minority owned businesses and then owned and
rented properties, what is that compared to. If there were funding, and only a percentage was given, and
in some of those tables it only looks like one minority and is that compared to 100 non-minorities or two
non-minorities, it doesn’t give context. Gabel acknowledged that is another good question. That's another
table that's auto generated. One thing they wanted to start doing when the Commission goes through
their funding cycle and awards funds, is have the organizations fill out a form which covers demographic
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 11 of 15
11
data and those kinds of things. There is room for more reporting there. As far as comparisons, that's
something they could look at in future CAPERS and she could make a separate table that might make
more sense and have more comparisons over time.
Vogel asked who are they providing this report to and what is the requirement that requires them to send
this out or prepare this document. Gabel explained HUD requires report, it is posted for public comment,
but she hasn’t got any public comment. Vogel asked if HUD doesn't care if those tables are correct or
not. Gabel said in IDIS they can see whether the activities were or were not completed and what the
accomplishments were, so it’s not that the system is wrong, it’s just not presented very well in the table.
Drabek noted that perhaps what Vogel is asking is what are the regulatory consequences of sending a
falsified or otherwise useless report. Gabel responded that HUD has access to the same database that
the City does and can see everything in real time. Kubly agreed and said their HUD rep looks at the City
tables because they're actually easier to read. She added one of the issues they ran into this year is that
normally they have their action plan, and it's reviewed and submitted. But this year, the action plan was
open, because they were revising CARES Act funds and that may have impacted the results of some of
these tables.
Mohammad noted he read through the report and found the City completed 9 of the 11 goals and he is
just wondering why they did not complete all the 11 goals. Gabel noted one of the goals not completed
was slum and blight and believes that was because priorities are shifting away from that. So typically,
that's like facades of buildings but with all the issues in Iowa City things have just shifted towards funding
different kinds of projects like housing. Another reason would be there's sometimes a delay between
when projects are started and when they're completed. She stated there were two more public facility
projects that would have had them meet that goal but because they weren't completed in this fiscal year,
they won't show up in this report. They will be completed eventually and reflected in a CAPER in the
future.
Drabek acknowledged with all those goals, if there was one that that did not get accomplished it would be
that one as there's a lot of disagreement over what slum and blight means.
Vogel had one more question on the attachments, the valuation of property stuff and the foregone taxes.
Are those four residential, affordable housing properties owned by the City that the City doesn't pay taxes
on. Gabel said those are other projects funded for different agencies such as Shelter House, Successful
Living and Mayor's Youth. Vogel asked if those are TIF projects where taxes have been waived for a
period of years, is that what that valuation of foregone taxes is. If those are taxes that they've also
waived for projects from the City side as part of TIF agreements, perhaps they should also take into
consideration what the true value of funds in addition to CDBG and HOME funds given to agencies.
Kubly explained it is a tax exemption for affordable housing providers and the Wakefield one is a Shelter
House project with five units in a peer assistance program that was discussed earlier.
Vogel asked then those properties in addition to getting CDBG/HOME funds also get a waiver of property
taxes for what it looks like 10 years or 5 years. Kubly believes so.
Vogel motioned to approve the FY20 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report for
distribution to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Mohammad seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
Kubly said they will submit it to HUD before the deadline of December 27.
AID TO AGENCY VISIT REPORTS:
Nkumu was assigned as liaison for the Arc of Southeast Iowa and Pathways Adult Day Health Center.
Starting with Arc he spoke with Chelsey Markle on November 10 and in general the theme is the same
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 12 of 15
12
where all the agencies are experiencing difficulties due to COVID. They are doing their best with the
resources they have to continue to provide services to community members. Specifically for Arc,
they have experienced a significant reduction in in-home service and individual service due to reduction
to staffing level. A lot of their staff, especially full-time staff, have withdrawn from working due to risk
associated with COVID which has put Arc in a difficult situation for providing full service and having to rely
on part time employees right now. Another problem is that the need for their services is really growing
and they're not able to keep up because it's really hard right now to attract new employees that can do the
job.
Another point is Arc runs a daycare program, which he believes is funded by the HCDC, and they are
very appreciative of the funding they get from us, but it's just not enough. They're doing what they can
because they have to remain affordable to the community. Without more funding, they will have to
increase the volume in order to cover the costs of running the daycare. They said they have about 10
people right now compared to what they usually have pre-COVID period. Another thing they wanted to
report was the support for the caregivers is very crucial and very much needed in this time, because
caregivers are so overwhelmed right now and stressed out, they have to take care of their loved ones and
they still have a need to earn income and it’s really hard to balance those two needs at the same time.
Nkumu moved onto the report from Pathways, again this is basically a daycare but it's an adult day care
center for adults over 18 years old with disability. It is only daytime care and then those adults have to
return home in the evening. Like most agencies, they're also experiencing a lot of hardship due to COVID
in order to fully provide the service the way they usually do. The one thing they mentioned is that the
hardest thing right now for the agency is bringing people in groups, keeping those people healthy, and
trying to minimize the risk of infecting others, and then returning those people home. So it's a very
challenging situation that they are dealing with. Right now they are doing three times more work than
they usually do with less people as they're also experiencing shortage of staff and there's a lot of more
services that are needed than before. Again, they noted the appreciation for receiving HCDC funding.
Pathways is also stressing regardless of the challenges they are facing, they are providing service
appropriately in the community across the board, especially serving the minority groups and not
shortchanging any group because of lack of resources.
Drabek made a brief comment that they’ll probably see a lot of similar themes to these reports from the
agencies, lots of discussion of COVID, shortages of staff and volunteers.
Kealey reported she toured the Free Medical Clinic and did a zoom with United Action for Youth (UAY).
Beginning with the United Action for Youth, the executive director Stu Mullins is on leave, so she talked to
Ally Hanten, the chief programs officer, who’s been with them about 12 years. She showed Kealey
through their offices. They have a transitional living program and a young parent program that serves
youth under 25 years old. They serve people who have children until they're in kindergarten. They also
use community donations to set up a shop for diapers and other items, the women's rotary assists with
that. UAY receives about 60% of their referrals are from peers and word of mouth. 40% of their referrals
are from school districts, clinics, midwives, WIC, DHS referrals, DVIP, Shelter House. With regards to
diversity they usually serve about 100 families with 70% African American, 15% white and 15% Hispanic.
She noted there has been a decrease in teen birth rate, and they had only about 67 families that they
served. Their budget is about $1.5 million and they have federal and local grants. Their prevention efforts
are local, and private, their intervention and young parent program is all state funded, and their
transitional housing is all federal money. They have 15% of their funds as unrestricted.
Kealey noted a lot of the office staff is working remotely, which is common with COVID, their
interventional living program, which serves 16 to 22 year olds, and they do work with Foundation 2 in
Cedar Rapids if people aren't familiar with that, but they can work with kids for up to two months. UAY
does have some properties where they can serve up to 11 kids. Hanten stressed their prevention
program is really built on and striving to have another safe adult in each one of these kids lives, that if
they do that, that they're more successful. She's really focusing on trying to measure outcomes and that's
her focus over this time. Additionally she's does a survey with them after they are done with the services
to see if they need to increase their number of services and if they need to increase the number of
families and outreach and nurturing primary care contacts. They need to see if young adults have primary
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 13 of 15
13
care doctors, increased immunizations, employment, if they have safe housing, and they asked them if
they felt like the program has helped them. Kealey did ask Hanten if they had any wish list items and she
just said more clarity on our process for aid to these agencies as they work really hard on the grant and
hope we could streamline it as the Commission has discussed in the last couple meetings. Kealey also
got to see, via zoom, the youth area which is closed right now due to COVID which is really sad because
it’s a pretty impressive place. It's in Clocktower Plaza, where kids can go and make music and get guitar
lessons and do art and it's super awesome.
Kealey actually got to go tour the Free Medical Clinic, this was her first time meeting Barb Vinograde, she
has been the director there for seven years. They receive some local funding through United Way, about
$100,000, they write grants for about $90,000 and their fundraising is around $150,000 of private
donations. Their operating budget is about $600,000 to $650,000. She added that they get in-kind
benefits from University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics for specimen control, which is free. They get UIHC
pharmacy aid where they purchased the meds at cost. The Iowa Department of Public Health has a
central repository for meds which they utilize, Mercy helps them with radiology where they get free
mammograms, ultrasounds, orthopedic x-rays, etc. And at Steindler they get about five x-rays per month.
Every year they have about $1.6 million in in-kind services in volunteers, their lab, radiology, supplies and
whatnot. The Free Medical Clinic also has a dental center. The people the Clinic serves are surprising to
most people, there are people with PhDs, people who can't read or write, people with every language,
immigrants and refugees, all from every socioeconomic status. Pre-pandemic they had six clinics per
week and four of the six were chronic conditions like diabetes and cardiac issues as greater than 60% of
the people that go there have a chronic medical condition. They also have two night clinics that are
staffed by medical students who serve as volunteers. Then there is the dental clinic, Dr. Brad Styles and
Dick Parrot started that it's now called the Parrot Styles Free Dental Clinic. During COVID they have not
been doing as much dental stuff but were starting to ramp that back up again. They do go into the
schools to have healthy kids school-based clinics and they also have developed specialty care for
patients such as dermatology, physical therapy, ophthalmology, rheumatology, prenatal/postpartum
gynecology, and HIV counseling. Due to COVID they had to put their volunteers on hold because of
space concerns because the spaces are very small, before they were seeing about 100 people per week,
they have been starting to bring people back again, mostly working on the chronic stuff but did add
telehealth. They also noted the Derecho in Cedar Rapids was significant issue, and that they have been
working with the Cedar Rapids clinic there and trying to assist them. Vinograde said 52% of their clients
identify as Hispanic, Latino, and the majority speak Spanish.
Vogel asked if they rent that building or do they own that building. Kealey is unsure, Vogel commented
that it is a nice facility.
Drabek suggested in the respect for time pushing the rest of the presentations to the December meeting,
or into the January meeting. Gabel noted there is currently no meeting scheduled for December, but the
January meeting is very light if they want to push to that.
Everyone agreed that would be best.
HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION:
Gabel announced an implicit bias training on the night of December 2nd that anyone is invited to attend.
She reiterated there is no meeting in December, the next meeting is January 21, 2021. On that agenda
they will have a couple more project monitoring presentations. The FY22 CDBG and HOME process
begins in February.
Kubly gave an update on COVID funding. All the projects from the COVID first round of Cares Act
funding projects are underway and they're expecting to receive their third round of funding, which is for
small business assistance, probably by next week. They are going through an RFP process for an
outside agency to administer those funds but that should be up and running within a couple weeks.
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 14 of 15
14
Kubly also wanted to talk about the affordable housing plan. Staff are expecting to be working on
affordable housing plan based on Council direction starting early next year. There was some discussion
at the work session on Tuesday about what Council wanted to be in incorporated into the plans and now
they have a little bit of direction on that. There will be a steering committee, invitations will go out early
next year for that, she expects there will be some representation from HCDC on that committee.
Lewis asked about the bias training and if it was required for boards and commissions. Gabel replied it
was her impression that it was recommended but not required.
Drabek asked if there is a quorum issue if too many people show up for the training. Gabel will have to
look into that, it may be in a webinar format where you're not able to communicate with each other, she
will find out the answer.
Vogel asked in regard to the steering committee, do they envision that all members of HCDC will be part
of the committee or just select members to be on the steering committee. Kubly replied she thinks they
are trying to keep the size of the steering committee to a certain number so it won't be the entire
commission, but there will be a representative from HCDC.
Vogel volunteered to be on the committee if possible. Alter would also volunteer to be on the steering
committee.
ADJOURNMENT:
Vogel moved to adjourn. Kealey seconded the motion and a vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
Housing and Community Development Commission
November 19, 2020
Page 15 of 15
15
Housing and Community
Development Commission
Attendance Record 2020-2021
• Resigned from Commission
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Vacant
Name Terms Exp. 7/16 8/20 9/17 10/15 11/19
Aguilar, Peggy 6/30/22 O/E X X O/E O/E
Alter, Megan 6/30/21 X X O/E X X
Drabek, Matt 6/30/22 X X X O/E X
Kealey, Lyn Dee 6/30/22 X X X O/E X
Lewis, Thersea 6/30/23 X X X X X
Mohammed, Nsar 6/30/23 X X O/E X X
Nkumu, Peter 6/30/22 O/E X O/E X X
Padron, Maria 6/30/21 X X O/E X O/E
Vogel, Kyle 6/30/23 X X X O/E X
City of Iowa City
FY21 Funding Allocation Timeline
Dates Subject to Change
December 28
2020
CDBG/HOME and Emerging Aid to Agencies applications are available
January 7
2021
CDBG/HOME Virtual Applicant Workshop via Zoom 11:00 AM
Meeting Link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85957446690?pwd=NCtBUEhxMHR2VGl4d3JXVHRxQWtDZz
09
Meeting ID: 859 5744 6690
Passcode: 348930
January 12
2021
CDBG/HOME Virtual Applicant Workshop via Zoom 3:00pm (Upon request)
Meeting Link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83316170685?pwd=YmNac0c1S1AxZDU0Y3pkVzBZOC9nZz0
9
Meeting ID: 833 1617 0685
Passcode: 219295
January 29,
2021
CDBG / HOME Applications and Emerging Aid to Agencies Applications due to City of
Iowa City by noon
February 18
2021
HCDC meeting: question and answer discussion with applicants. Applicants are invited to
attend
March 1
2021
HCDC ranking forms due to City staff
March 11
2021
HCDC meeting: review of groupings and consensus funding scenario. Make award
recommendation to City Council on CDBG/HOME and A2A Emerging funding.
April 1
2021
30-day comment period begins for draft Annual Action Plan
April 15
2021
HCDC meeting: review Annual Action Plan and recommendation to City Council
April 30
2021
30-day comment period ends for the draft Annual Action Plan
May 3
2021
CDBG / HOME Financial Verification Applications due
May 5
2021
City Council: public meeting for the Annual Action Plan and resolution.
May 15
2021
Annual Action Plan submitted to HUD
July 1
2021
New fiscal year begins
September 15
2021
Execute CDBG and HOME agreements with grant recipients
Date: July 23, 2020
To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager
From: Stefanie Bowers, Human Rights Coordinator & Equity Director
Re: Update on Racial Equity Toolkits
City Council Resolution 20-159 called for the continued use of the racial equity toolkit by City Departments and for expanded training on such tools for the City Council and
business community. This memo provides a brief memo on the history of the City’s use of a Racial Equity Toolkit (RET). To date, all City departments and divisions have been introduced to utilizing a RET to review initiatives, policies, programs, and services with the specific intent on elevating opportunities, identifying issues and other considerations to better inform City services as it relates to racial equity. Since 2017, departments have been receiving more individualized instruction from the Equity Director on how to better meet the needs of the community with the use of RET. This individualized instruction includes having each department use a RET on 2 current procedures, policies, program, or service, and 1 new (or potential new) procedure, policy, program, or service. The RET utilized is adapted from The Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) and King County (Seattle), Washington. The RET lays out a process and a set of questions to guide the development, implementation and evaluation of services, policies, initiatives, programs, and budget issues to address the impacts on communities of color. The RET has three stages. Stage I What is the impact of the proposal on determinants of equity? The aim of the first stage is to determine whether the proposal will have an impact on equity or not. Stage II Assessment: Who is affected? This stage identifies who is likely to be affected by the proposal. Stage III Impact review: Opportunities for action The third stage involves identifying the impacts of the proposal from an equity perspective. The goal is to develop a list of likely impacts and acti ons to ensure that negative impacts can be mitigated, and positive impacts enhanced. City Council members, all Department Directors, and all Division Heads were first introduced to RET in November 2015, when the Government Alliance of Race and Equity (GARE) delivered an all-day training on Race Matters: Tools & Strategies for Eliminating Racial Inequity. The City became a member of GARE earlier that fall, the second city in the State of Iowa, and are to present. GARE is a national network of government working to achieve racial equity and advance opportunities for all. GARE provides a multi -layered approach for maximum impact by supporting a targeted cohort of jurisdictions and providing best practices, tools, and resources to help build and
July 23, 2020
Page 2
sustain current efforts and build a national movement for racial equity. By developing a
“collective impact” approach firmly grounded in inclusion, government can play a key role in collaborations for achieving racial equity, centering community, and leveraging institutional partnerships. Example RET Outcomes: • Elimination of late fees for books in the children's and teen collections at the library. • Improved process for how employment opportunities are advertised and promoted to the community. • Translations of core City documents in French African, Mandarin, Spanish, Swahili, and Arabic. • Increased the number of participants in the Low-Income Utility Discount Program. • Increased outreach to neighborhoods that have higher numbers of nuisance and discrimination complaints. • Requirement of a Black, Indigenous, Persons of Color (BIPOC) impact statement as part of the Grants Management Policy. • Creation of an online feedback form for the Police Department. Racial Equity Training To better assist City Department, Divisions and City Council operationalize around racial equity, supportive trainings have continued to be offered. In April of 2017, the City sponsored an all -day GARE training offered to all City staff and City Council members on Advancing Racial Equity: The Role of Government. Topics at the training included: Key Racial Equity Concepts, Operationalizing Around Racial Equity , Using a Racial Equity Toolkit, Race Out of Place: A Conversation about Race and Policing , Workforce Equity: The Public Sector as an Employer , and Mitigating Implicit Bias: Designing and Implementing A Comprehensive Professional Development Program. More recently, to further assist City staff across all sectors in shifting real decision making power and equitable resources to those most harmed by the lingering legacy and reality of racism in our community , GARE delivered an all-day training on Advancing Racial Equity: Key Steps to Inclusive Public Engagement in March of 2019. All GARE trainings have been in addition to supplemental programming the City offers to staff on an ongoing basis on implicit/unconscious bias, cultural competency/proficiency, and other opportunities to review our work as City Staff on matters of racial equity. To support City staff in normalizing concepts of racial equity, organizing staff to work together for transformational change, and operationalizing new practices, policies and procedures that result in more fair and just outcomes, t he Equity Director continues to take advanced trainings based upon best practices across the country to better assist in advancing racial equity that is utilized in the individualized instructions to City departments and divisions with the practical goal of reducing racial disparities/disproportionately and, ultimately, achieving racial equity. Looking Ahead The Equity Director will continue to work with City staff from all departments to expand knowledge and use of the RET. Changes to policy and practices will be implemented by departments on an ongoing basis and when appro priate presented to the City Manager or City Council for approval. As an example, in the coming weeks staff will present
proposed changes to the City’s utility billing practices that stem from an internal use of the RET.
July 23, 2020
Page 3
Staff is currently working on related training opportunities for the general public and the business community. Opportunities for training have been offered throughout July from
the City’s Senior Center, Library and Office of Human Rights. This includes a July 22 nd business community training that reached maximum capacity. These efforts will be
expanded in the coming months to help advance the Council’s racial equity objectives.
RACIAL EQUITY TOOLKIT
(RET)
Presenter’s note this is based on model created by Driving Toward Equity by the USDN Urban Sustainability Directors
Network
specific geographic areas
racial demographics
root causes or factors influencing racial inequities
performance level data
data would be helpful in
analyzing the proposal
communities been engaged
most affected community members
told you about the burdens
or benefits for different groups
factors
that produce or perpetuate inequity
Question 4
Actions to mitigate/enhance negative/positive
impact.
This stage involves identifying the impacts of
the proposal from an equity perspective. The
goal is to develop a list of likely impacts and
actions to ensure that negative impacts are
mitigated, and positive impacts are enhanced.
Population Affected
Disproportionately
Describe Potential Positive
Impact (Beneficial)
Describe Potential
Negative Impact (Adverse)
Actions to enhance
positive or mitigate
negative/other comments
Columns 2 and 3 are a detailed discussion of the positive and negative impacts of the proposal on the identified
population by groups, for example, race/ethnicity, or income and limited English speakers. In Column 4, describe
any recommendations or actions which arise from your discussions about impact. These might include: • Ways in
which the program/policy could be modified to enhance positive impacts, to reduce negative impacts for
identified population groups; • Ways in which benefits of modifying program/policy to remove differential
impacts outweigh the costs or disadvantages of doing so; • Ways in which existing partnerships could be
strengthened to benefit the most affected.
cost
impact
feasibility
other resources
implement
timing
1.Based on your rankings you are going to recommendation
which is the best action to take and why;
2. Describe how you plan to implement;
3. There are provisions to ensure ongoing data collection, public
reporting, and community participation?
4. What are the success indicators and progress benchmarks?
Question 5 Ƭ͞Plan ImplementationȀAccountability
When modifications are not possible, the option of not proceeding with the
proposal needs to be addressed. Occasionally, it is possible to find a single, clear
solution which will provide the optimum impact. However, in most cases a series
of options will be defined and presented.
City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule
Subject to change
January 7, 2021
Date Time Meeting Location
Saturday, January 9, 2021 8:00 AM Budget Work Session Zoom Meeting Platform
Tuesday, January 19, 2021 5:00 PM Work Session Zoom Meeting Platform
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Monday, January 25, 2021 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting Zoom Meeting Platform
Hosted by the City of Coralville
Tuesday, February 2, 2021 5:00 PM Iowa City Conference Board Mtg. Zoom Meeting Platform
Work Session
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Tuesday, February 16, 2021 5:00 PM Work Session Zoom Meeting Platform
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Tuesday, March 2, 2021 5:00 PM Iowa City Conference Board Mtg Zoom Meeting Platform
Work Session
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Tuesday, March 16, 2021 5:00 PM Work Session Zoom Meeting Platform
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Tuesday, April 6, 2021 5:00 PM Work Session Zoom Meeting Platform
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Tuesday, April 20, 2021 5:00 PM Work Session Zoom Meeting Platform
7:00 PM Formal Meeting
Aid to Agencies Assignments
Housing and Community Development Commission
HCDC
Liaison
Agency Contact
Person
Email
Aguilar Iowa Valley Habitat for
Humanity
Heath
Brewer
heath@iowavalleyhabitat.org
Table to Table Nicki Ross mail@table2table.org
Alter HACAP Jane
Drapeaux
jdrapeaux@hacap.org
Rape Victim Advocacy
Program
Adam
Robinson
adam-robinson@uiowa.edu
Drabek CommUnity Crisis Services and
Food Bank
Becci
Reedus
becci.reedus@builtbycommunity.org
Inside Out Reentry Community Michelle
Heinz
insideoutreentry@gmail.com
Kealey Iowa City Free Medical
Clinic/Dick Parrott Free Dental
Clinic
Barbara
Vinograde
bvinograde@freemedicalclinic.org
United Action for Youth Ally Hanten ally.hanten@unitedactionforyouth.or
g
Lewis 4 Cs Community Coordinated
Child Care
Missie
Forbes
Missie@iowa4cs.com
Domestic Violence
Intervention Program
Kristie
Doser
Kristie@dvipiowa.org
Mohammed Prelude Behavioral Services Ron Berg rberg@preludeiowa.org
Shelter House Crissy
Canganelli
crissy@shelterhouseiowa.org
Nkumu Arc of Southeast Iowa Chelsey
Markle
chelseymarkle@arcsei.org
Pathways Adult Day Health
Center/Aging Services, Inc.
Lindsay
Glynn
lglynn@abbehealth.org
Padron Free Lunch Program Ronda
Lipsius
icfreelunch@gmail.com
Neighborhood Centers of
Johnson County
Brian
Loring
brian-loring@ncjc.org
Vogel Big Brothers Big Sisters of
Johnson County
Daleta
Thurness
daletac@iastate.edu
Horizons, A Family Service
Alliance
Sofia
Mehaffey
smehaffey@horizonsfamily.org